Following the Path From Flint
| Author | Steve Via |
| Position | Director of federal relations at American Water Works Association |
| Pages | 61-61 |
NOVEMBER/DECEMBER 2021 | 61
Reprinted by permission from The Environmental Forum®, November/December 2021.
Copyright © 2021, Environmental Law Institute®, Washington, D.C. www.eli.org.
THE DEBATE
are entirely or partially made of
lead, and require replacement of
galvanized pipe preceded by lead
pipe. is expanded denition of
what constitutes a lead service line
will likely result in a higher estimate
of lead pipes nationwide. Although
many water systems have not yet
completed inventories, previous
estimates from AWWA and EPA
suggested between 6 and 10 million
lead service lines remain. We can
anticipate that those gures — and
the total cost of lead service line re-
placement — will grow.
Whether the typical replace-
ment cost is $4,500 or $10,000, few
households are immediately pre-
pared to take on a signicant share
of the cost of replacement. House-
holds with lower incomes may face a
disproportionate share of these costs,
since they more often occupy older
housing stock that is more likely to
have lead service lines.
Federal funding can soften the
nancial blow of lead service line
replacement for low-income house-
holds, as well as when the costs of
replacement are being shared by all
customers — by the broader com-
munity. e availability of a federal
funding subsidy also helps overcome
the legal barrier in some states where
public funds cannot be used for im-
provements to individual properties.
It is not clear how much federal
funding will be made available at
the time this article is published.
But there is little prospect that the
amount will be sucient to com-
pletely fund the replacement of all
lead service lines across the United
States. In practice, lead service line
replacement will require funding
from multiple sources, including
higher water rates, additional fees,
community investment, and home-
owner payments, even if there is a
substantial federal contribution.
ere is broad agreement among
many dierent interests that, despite
the cost, getting lead service lines
out once-and-for-all is worth the ef-
fort. e goal of full replacement of
all lead service lines is being champi-
oned by a coalition of more than 28
organizations, the Lead Service Line
Replacement Collaborative. e col-
laborative’s materials, rst released
in 2017 (lslr-collaborative.org), were
funded in part by Pisces and Spring-
point Partners, but primarily ac-
complished with sweat equity from
the member organizations. ey
highlight the key steps communities
need to embrace in order to advance
lead service line replacement.
e cost of lead service line re-
placement impacts communities and
households in very dierent ways.
A January/February 2017 article in
this magazine authored by AWWA
CEO David LaFrance, “e Path
From Flint,” spoke to the hurdles
individual communities face, such
as signicant amounts of capital in-
vestment required. Other challenges
involve the need for improvements
on both public and private property,
and large-scale, collaborative plan-
ning, including the development of
a much more complete accounting
of where lead service lines are.
For all its warts, the Lead and
Copper Rule, with its focus on cor-
rosion control, has led to very low
lead levels in water for most Ameri-
cans. e planned replacement of
lead service lines is the right next
step in risk reduction. Achieving
the goal of a future without lead
in contact with water will require
decades of work, but funding from
Congress is critical in accelerating
that process.
Steve Via is director of federal relations at
American Water Works Association.
Following
the Path
From Flint
By Steve Via
SINCE the failures in Flint,
Michigan, several years ago,
the American Water Works
Association has adopted a pol-
icy that “encourages communities
to develop a lead reduction strategy
that includes identifying and remov-
ing all lead service lines over time,”
recognizing that “as long as there is
lead in contact with drinking water,
some risks remain.”
e goal of replacing all lead ser-
vice lines — on both public and pri-
vate property, and in their entirety
— is achievable. However, it cannot
be accomplished without recogniz-
ing that a collaborative, societal
approach is necessary, and federal
funding is going to be an important
factor.
is is true for several reasons.
First, lead service lines are not uni-
formly distributed across the United
States. Rather, they are locally abun-
dant in communities, or portions of
communities, that developed before
copper and plastic pipes became
the service line materials of choice.
us, the burden of lead service line
replacement will be much greater for
some communities.
Second, full lead service line re-
placement in older urban settings
can be very expensive. e U.S. En-
vironmental Protection Agency has
illustrated a range of replacement
costs per line from $1,959–6,024,
but in some urban centers, utilities
have found that typical replacement
costs will total more than $20,000
per line.
It appears that the next iteration
of the Lead and Copper Rule will
require replacement of lead service
lines on both public and private
property. It may also mandate re-
placement of portions of pipes that
To continue reading
Request your trial